The most correct view regarding Allah’s saying: {When He decrees a matter, He only says to it, “Be,” and it is.} [2:117] is to say: it is general in everything that Allah decreed and administered, because the apparent of that is generality, and it is not permissable to interpret the apparent to a hidden meaning of taweel without evidence, due to the reason I mentioned in my book “Kitab al-Bayan ‘an Usool al-Ahkam”.

And if this is the case, then Allah’s –Ta’ala Dhikruh– command for a thing, if he willed its formation/existence, is with His saying {kun (Be)}. In the moment of His Will –Jal Thana’uh– for it to become, the existence of that which He willed its formation does not proceed His Will for it, nor His command (i.e. kun/Be) for it to be, nor does it delay; because it is not possible that a thing be commanded to exist except that it is existent, and willed so; nor (is it possible) that it be existent except that it be commanded to exist, and willed so.

And like His saying {When He decrees a matter, He only says to it, “Be,” and it is.} is His saying: {Among His Signs is that heaven and earth hold firm by His command. Then, when He calls you forth from the earth, you will emerge at once.} [30:25], The emergence of the people from their graves does not precede Allah’s call to them, nor does it delay.”

Question: Why does Saudi Arabia permit celebrating the commemoration of Muhammad bin Abdel Wahhab in a conference, paying hundreds
of thousands for it, and it is not allowed for us to celebrate the commemoration of the mawlid of the Messenger of Allah -Sallallahu alayhi wa sallam-?
Who is more deserving of that: the Messenger of Allah -Sallallahu alayhi wa sallam- or Muhammad bin Abdel Wahhab?
This is a question that some of the people of knowledge of Damascus ask, please give us an answer.

The Answer:
All praise be to Allah alone, and Salat and Salam be upon the Messenger of Allah
The week of shaikh Muhammad bin Abdel Wahhab was only an academic conference held in 1400 Hijri, under the supervision of the Islamic
University of Imam Muhammad bin Sa’ud in Riyadh, it consisted for a number of researches regarding the dawah of shaikh Muhammad bin Abdel
Wahhab in terms of its emergence and its affects, and the doubts created surrounding it with its refutation. In addition to that, the works of
shaikh Muhammad bin Abdel Wahhab were printed after compiling and organizing it.

The difference between that conference and the celebration of the Prophetic Mawlid is obvious, as the week of shaikh Muhammad bin Abdel
Wahhab was not an act of worship itself, what was meant by it is to inform about this dawah and to do justice to its reviver; also, the week of the
shaikh does not reoccur or return as is the case with the ones who celebrate the Prophetic Mawlid, tending it every year; while this week was
held about a quarter century ago, and has ended.

—————-

Shaikh Ibn Uthaimeen -rahimahullah-:

The shaikh was asked: What is the difference between what is called “The week of shaikh Muhammad bin Abdel Wahhab” -Rahimahullah, and
the celebration of the Prophetic Mawlid, as the second is condemned, while the first isn’t?

So he answered:
“The difference between them -according to our knowledge- is from two sides:
The first is: the week of shaikh Muhammad bin Abdel Wahhab -Rahimahullah Ta’ala- was not done as a means to get closer to Allah -Azza wa Jal-, it is only meant for removing doubts that are in the hearts of some people towards this man, and to show what Allah has blessed the
Muslims through this man.
لإhe second is: the week of shaikh Muhammad bin Abdel Wahhab -Rahimahullah- does not reoccur and return (every year) as is the case with
‘Eids; it is something that has been clarified to the people, things were written in it, and the truth regarding this man, that was not known before,
was shown to many people, then it ended.”

The Question:
The people of innovation say: You commemorate some individuals or like the week of shaikh Muhammad bin Abdel Wahhab – rahimahullah-,
they say: what we do is similar to that, and the Messenger -alayhi assalam- is greater than Imam Muhammad?

The answer:
The Messenger of Allah is greater than all human beings, but the commemoration of the Messenger (Sallallahu alayhi wa sallam) is not specific to to this night. I have mentioned to you before, that every act of worship includes the commemoration of the Messenger -alayhi assalatu
wasSalam-, this is from one point, and from another point: the week of Muhammad bin Abdul Wahhab, was it made into a eid that reoccurs? we
say: it was not made an eid … and an eid is something that returns and reoccurs, you made this (i.e. mawlid) an eid that reoccurs every year, and
this is munkar; that is why if someone, one day, stood up and spoke about the mission of the Messenger – alayhi asSalatu wasSalam- and his
visiting, we would not call him an innovator, but to make it into an eid that reoccurs every year like a the religious eids such as Eid al Fitr and Eid
Al-Adha, then this is munkar; and if we assume that the week of the Muhammad bin Abdul Wahhab was wrong, does that mean we compare a
wrong with wrong? we don’t.

Dawud bin Ali said : We were at Ibn Al-‘Arabi, and a man came up to him and said: “O Abu Abdullah, what is the meaning of Allah’s saying:
(Ar-Rahmanu ‘ala al-Arsh Istawa – The Most Merciful upon the Throne Istawa) ?
He (Ibn Al A’rabi) said: “He is on (‘ala) His Throne like He informed.”
So the man said: “It is not like that, It means: Istawla (conquered or took over).”
So Ibn Al-A’rabi said to him: “And what makes you know what this is?! The Arabs do not say about a man: istawla upon something unless he has an opposition in it. Then whoever of the two defeats the other, it is said: istawla; and there is no opponent to Allah, and He is on His Throne like He informed.”
(An authentic reported quoted by al Bayhaqi in his book al sifat and others)

Al Bayhaqi rahimahullah mentioned in his book “Al Asmaa was-Sifat” :

قال : وليس ذلك في الآية بمعنى الاستيلاء ، لأن الاستيلاء غلبة مع توقع ضعف(And he said: “And istila (conquoring or taking over) is not from the meaning of the ayah, because istila’ is dominance with anticipation of weakness.”)
Ibn Kathir rahimahullah said in his book “al Bidayah wan-Nihaya“, when speaking about al Akhtal who was an Arab Christian poet :

[And he is the one who vocalized his poetry to Bishr bin Marwan, in which he said:. ]

Istawa Bishr over Iraq without a sword or spilt blood.

And these verses (of poetry) are used as evidence by the Jahmiyah that Istiwa’ over the Throne means: al Istila’ (conquer, take over), and this is from the distortion of the speech, and there is no proof in this Christian’s poetry verse for that.

And Allah Azza wa Jal didn’t intend by His Istiwa on the Throne that He conquered it, greatly exalted be Allah from the saying of the Jahmiyyah. Becasue it is said: Istawa upon something if that thing was rebellious or resistant to him before he took it over, like the conquering of Bishr over Iraq, and the taking over of a city by the king after its rebellion against him.
And the Throne of the Lord was not forbiden or inaccessable for Him, for one to say: Istawa over it or the meaning of Istiwa’ is “isteela”.

And you will not find a weaker proof than that of the Jahmiya, to the point of their lack of proof leading them to using a poetic verse by an ugly censured Christian, and there is no proof in it, and Allah Knows best

November 7, 2008

It was said that the first to innovate the Mawlid were the Ubaydeen (called Fatimads), and others say that the first was king al Muzaffar Kukabri (549 – 630 A.H.) of Irbil.

Ibn Kallikan, who was a witness of the Mawlid of al Mudhaffar/Muzaffar, reported how the mawlid was, in his book “Wifayat al A’yan“; he said:

“The pomp with which he celebrated the birthday of the Prophet (Mawlid) surpassed all description ; but I will mention a part of it:

The people of the neighbouring provinces have heard of his good belief in regards to the Prophet sallallahu alayhi was allam, so every year, a big number of fuqaha, Sufis, preachers, Quran recitors, and poets would come from near lands – such as baghdad, Mawsel, al Jazira …etc. – and they would continue coming from Muharram until the begining of Rabi’ al Awwal. Before that, al Mudhaffar would have already erected wooden pavilions, each pavilion is 4 or 5 stories, and he would make more than 20 wooden pavilions, one for him, and the rest for the amirs, and high ranking personal in his state.

Then when it was the first of the month of Safar (month before Rabi’ al Awwal), these pavilions were decorated in a most splendid manner, and in every pavilion sat a group of singers, a group of composers/actors, and musicians; not a story was left without the company of these people.

During the whole period all business was suspended, and the only occupation of the people was to watch (the bands play) and walk from one band to another. These pavilions were erected from the gate of the citadel/castle to the door of the khanqah (A place for Sufi retreat for worship) that is near the field/hippodrome. Everyday, after Asr prayer, Mudhaffar Ad-Deen would go and stop at each pavilion, one by one, listening to their singing, and watch their acting and other things done in the pavilions.

He then would pass the night in the khanqah, listening to the sufi religious singing; and after fajr prayer, he would ride out to hunt, and return to the citadel before dhuhr; this is what he did everyday until the day of the Mawlid.

He used to do the Mawlid one year on the eighth of the month, and the next on the twelfth, because of the difference of opinion regarding it (the date of his birth). Two days before the Mawlid, he would send a huge number of camels, cattle, and sheep to the field, accompanied with drums, singers, and musicians. Then they begin the slaughtering of the animals, and set up a number of caldrons, and cook in various manners.

Then when it was the eve of the Mawlid, after praying Maghrib, he would listen to the singing in the citadel; then he would go forth, preceeded by a great number of people bearing candles; two or four of these candles – not sure of the exact number – were such as employed in grand ceremonies, each of them being fastened on the back of a mule, with a man seated behind it to support it. He advanced in this manner until reaching the khanqah.

The morning of the next day, a quantity of pelisses were brought out to the khanqah by the sufis, in the hands of each of them is a bundle, and advanced one after the other. A great number of it is brought down, I can’t count how many. Then he would go to the khanqah; there gathered high distinct persons, chiefs, and a great number of other eminent individuals, and he would set up chairs for preaching. And there, set up for Mudhaffar Ad-Deen, would be a wooden tower with windows overlooking the place where the people and chairs of the preachers were, and other windows open on the field, which was extremely wide. In it the soldiers were gathered for display, and he would sometimes look at the soldiers, and other times towards the people and preachers; he would continue like this until the soldiers were done.

Right then, a repast was brought into the field for the poor, and it would be a public meal, consisting of an immense quantity of food and bread, that couldn’t be described. Then a second repast would be prepared in the khanqah for the people gathered at the chairs. And during the time of soldiers display and the preachers’ exhorting, he would send for each one of the eminant men, chiefs, and the comers for this festival, of whom we mentioned previously, from the fuqaha, preachers, Quran recitors, and poets; and he would cloth each in a pelisse, after which he would return to his place.

When all of that was done, the repast was brought in, and a portion of it was sent to the house of the ones whom were designated. This would continue until Asr time or after, then he would stay that night there, listening to sufi religious singing until day-break. This is what he does every year. And I have summarized the situation, because a full description of it would take a lot. When they were done with this festival, each person would get ready to go back to his country so he would give each his spending/outlay.”

November 6, 2008

The types of tawassul that are permissible, with no dispute amongst the scholars, are:

1. Tawassul through the beautiful Names and exalted Attributes:

Allah said – translation of the meaning- And (all) the Most Beautiful Names belong to Allâh, so call on Him by them. [Al A’raf (6):180]

Examples of this type of tawassul are found in the Quran and Sunnah:

Allah said, “And he said: ‘My Lord! Inspire and bestow upon me the power and ability that I may be grateful for Your Favours which You have bestowed on me and on my parents, and that I may do righteous good deeds that will please You, and admit me by Your Mercy among Your righteous slaves.’” [An Naml (27): 19]

The Messenger of Allah (peace be upon him) entered the mosque and saw a man who had finished his prayer, and was reciting the tashahhud saying:
“O Allah, I ask You, O Allaah, the One, the Single, the Self Sufficient Master Who needs none, but all have need of (Him), Who does not beget, nor was He begotten, nor is there any like Him…, that You forgive me my sins, indeed You are the Most forgiving, the Most Merciful’. ” [Sunan Abu Dawud : Book 3 Hadith 980]

The Messenger of Allah (saw) said:
“Whoever becomes greatly troubled or saddened and says: ‘ O Allaah I am Your slave, son of Your male slave and female slave. My forelock is in Your Hand. Your judgement is continually operative upon me. Your sentence concerning me is just. I ask You by every name which is Yours, with which You named Yourself, taught to anyone from Your creation, or sent down in Your Book, or which You kept to Yourself in the knowledge of the Hidden with You, that You make the Qur’aan the spring of my heart, the light of my chest, the removal of my sadness and of my anxiety’ then Allaah will remove his anxiety and sorrow and replace it with joy…” [Musnad Ahmad; Ahmad Shakir said: Sahih 5\267]

2. Tawassul through the supplicator’s own good deeds.

Examples in the Quran and Sunnah:

“Those who say: ‘Our Lord! We have indeed believed, so forgive us our sins and save us from the punishment of the Fire.’” [Al Imran (3):16]

“Our Lord! We believe in what You have sent down, and we follow the Messenger so write us down among those who bear witness (to the truth (i.e. Lâ ilâha ill-Allâh – none has the right to be worshipped but Allâh).” [Al Imran (3): 53]

The Prophet –sallallahu alayhi wa sallam- said, “While three persons were walking, rain began to fall and they had to enter a cave in a mountain. A big rock rolled over and blocked the mouth of the cave. They said to each other, ‘Invoke Allah with the best deed you have performed (so Allah might remove the rock)’. One of them said, ‘O Allah! My parents were old and I used to go out for grazing (my animals). On my return I would milk (the animals) and take the milk in a vessel to my parents to drink. After they had drunk from it, I would give it to my children, family and wife. One day I was delayed and on my return I found my parents sleeping, and I disliked to wake them up. The children were crying at my feet (because of hunger). That state of affairs continued till it was dawn. O Allah! If You regard that I did it for Your sake, then please remove this rock so that we may see the sky.’ So, the rock was moved a bit. The second said, ‘O Allah! You know that I was in love with a cousin of mine, like the deepest love a man may have for a woman, and she told me that I would not get my desire fulfilled unless I paid her one-hundred Dinars (gold pieces). So, I struggled for it till I gathered the desired amount, and when I sat in between her legs, she told me to be afraid of Allah, and asked me not to deflower her except rightfully (by marriage). So, I got up and left her. O Allah! If You regard that I did if for Your sake, kindly remove this rock.’ So, two-thirds of the rock was removed. Then the third man said, ‘O Allah! No doubt You know that once I employed a worker for one Faraq (three Sa’s) of millet, and when I wanted to pay him, he refused to take it, so I sowed it and from its yield I bought cows and a shepherd. After a time that man came and demanded his money. I said to him: Go to those cows and the shepherd and take them for they are for you. He asked me whether I was joking with him. I told him that I was not joking with him, and all that belonged to him. O Allah! If You regard that I did it sincerely for Your sake, then please remove the rock.’ So, the rock was removed completely from the mouth of the cave.” (Sahih Bukhari and Muslim)

Another example is: “O Allah I ask you by my love for your Prophet …..”; Because loving the Messenger of Allah is a good deed.

3. Tawassul by the supplication of a righteous living person, by asking them to make dua for you.

If a Muslim falls into great difficulty or a great misfortune befalls him, and he knows that he has been very negligent with regard to Allaah, the Blessed and Most High’s, rights upon him, so he wishes to use a strong means of drawing nearer to Allaah. So he goes to a man whom he believes to be righteous and asks him to supplicate to his Lord for him that He (Allaah) should relieve his distress and remove what had befallen him.

Examples from the Sunnah and the actions of the Sahabah (companions of the Messenger sallallahu alayhi wa sallam)

Anas b. Malik reported that a person entered the mosque through the door situated on theside of Daral-Qada’ during Friday (prayer) and the messenger of Allah (may peace be upon him) was delivering the sermon while standing. He came and stood in front of the Messenger of Allah (may peace be upon him) and said: “Messenger of Allah, the camels died and the passages were blocked; so supplicate Allah to send down rain upon us.”The Messenger of Allah (may peace be upon him) raised his hands and then said: (O Allah, send down rain upon us; O Allah, send dowp rain upon us; O Allah, send down rain upon us.)
Anas said:
By Allah, we did not see any cloud or any patch of it, and there was neither any house or building standing between us and the (hillock) Sal’a. There appeared a cloud in the shape of a shield from behind it, and as it (came high) in the sky it spread and then there was a downpour of rain. By Allah, we did not see the sun throughout the week. Then (that very man) came on the coming Friday through the same door when the Messenger of Allah (may peace be upon him) was standing and delivering the sermon. He stood in front of him and said: “Messenger of Allah, our animals died and the passages blocked. Supplicate Allah to stop the rain for us. ”The Messenger of Allah (may peace be upon him) again raised his hands and said: (O Allah, let it (rain) fall in our suburbs and not on us, O Allah (send it down) on the hillocks and small mountains and the river-beds and at places where trees grow.)
The rain stopped, and as we stepped out we were walking in sun- shine. He (the narrator) said to Sharik: I asked Anas b. Malik if he was the same man. He said: I do not know. [ Sahih Muslim: Book 4: Hadith 1955]

Narrated Anas: Whenever drought threatened them, ‘Umar bin Al-Khattab, used to ask Al-Abbas bin ‘Abdul Muttalib to invoke Allah for rain. He used to say, “O Allah! We used to ask our Prophet to invoke You for rain, and You would bless us with rain, and now we ask his uncle to invoke You for rain. O Allah ! Bless us with rain.” And so it would rain.

Ibn Hajar Al Asqalani –rahimahu Allah- said :

“And az-Zubair bin Bakkar showed in the ansab the description of the duaa of al-Abbasin this incident and the time in which that happened.
He narrated with his isnad that al Abbas, when Umar did istisqa’ through him, said: ” “O Allah, truly no tribulation descends except because of sin, nor is lifted except with repentence. The people have turned to you by means of me because of my position in relation to your prophet, and here are our hands [raised up] towards you – despite our sins – and our forelocks in repentence, so send down water for us.” Whereupon the sky let down water as thick as ropes.”

Then he said:

“And we benefit, from the story of Al Abbas, the recommendation (istihbab) of seeking intercession by the pious and the family of the Prophetsallallahu alayhi wa sallam.” [Fath al Bari]

Salim bin ‘Amer Al Khaba’iri reported: That the sky withheld all its rain, so Mu’awiyah ibn Abi Sufyan and the people of Damascus went out to pray for rain. So when Mu’awiyah sat upon the minbar he said: ‘Where is Yazid ibn al-Aswad al-Jurashi?’ So the people called him and he came stepping between the people. Then Mu’aawiyah commanded him and he ascended the minbar and sat at his feet. Then
Mu’awiyah said: “O Allaah we are today asking the best and most noble amongst us to supplicate to You for us, O Allaah today we put Yazeed ibn al-Aswad al-Jurashee forward to supplicate to You for us,” “O Yazeed raise up your hands to Allaah.” So he raised up his hands and the people raised up their hands. Then very quickly rain-clouds like a large shield came quickly from the west, and the wind blew and it rained so profusely that people could hardly reach their houses. [Sharh Usool I’tiqad Ahlus-Sunnah by Al Lalika’i]; Ibn Hajar al Asqalani said: “Abu Zur’ah Ad-Dimashqi and Ya’qub bin Sufyan narrated in their tarikh, with a sahih chain, through Salim bin ‘Amer ….” [al Isabah fi Tameez As Sahabah]

“Wassaltu to my Lord Wasilatan, means: I did a deed that by which I drew near to Him. And I did tawassul to someone by a book or a relative, means that I sought means of approach to him by it.
Labeed said:

‘I see that the people do not know the value of their affair,
where as every religious person seeks to draw nearer to Allaah.’

Qatadah said that the ayah means, “Seek the means of approach to Him by obeying Him and performing the acts that please Him.”

And there is no disagreement amongst the mufassireen on what those Imams said.

Thus the general meaning of Tawassul is to seek nearness to Allah through performing good deeds.
As for the specific meaning of Tawassul, it is to hope for and seek the answering of one’s duaa (supplication).

“Those who seek to make innovations good and acceptable claim that Imam ash-Shafi’i – may Allaah have mercy upon him – agrees to the concept of ‘good innovations’ – and they have taken it by what has been attributed to him – may Allaah have mercy upon him – regarding innovation: ’innovated matters are of two classes: that which is innovated and is contrary to the Book, or the Sunnah, or a narration, or ijmaa – then this is an innovation of misguidance, and: those good things which are innovated that do not contradict any of these – then this is a novelty which is not blameworthy. And ‘Umar said concerning the night-prayer in Ramadhaan: ‘what a good innovation this is’ meaning something new not previously present, and if done does not rebut anything which existed before.” [Reported by al-Bayhaqee in ‘Manaaqibush ash-Shafi’i (1/469) from ar-Rabee’ Ibn Sulaymaan. …..]

And it is reported with the wording: “Innovation is of two types: praiseworthy innovation and blameworthy innovation. So whatever agrees with the sunnah is praiseworthy, and whatever contradicts the sunnah is blameworthy.” And he used as evidence the saying of ‘Umar radiallaahu ‘anhu – about night prayer in Ramadhaan: ‘what a good innovation this is’ [reported by Abu Nu’aym in ‘Hilyatul Awliyaa’ (9/113)from Hurmulah Ibn Yahyaa.

.

.

…… (The part discussing the chain has been removed because it was proven to be authentic) ….

.

.

a) The saying of ash-Shafi’ee – even if authentic – cannot be used to oppose or particularize the generality of the hadeeth of Allaah’s Messenger sallallaahu ‘alayhi wa sallam, since ash-Shaafi’ee himself – rahimahullaah – is reported by his students to have said that the saying of a solitary companion is not a proof, and it is not obligatory for those after him to follow him [as in ‘Takhreej Furoo alaa al-‘Usul’ of az-Zanjaanee (pg. 179) with the checking of Muhammad Adeeb as-Saalih, ‘Mu’assatur Risaalah’]

And this is what the verifying scholar Ibnul-Qayyim affirmed in his ‘I’ilaam al-Muwaqqi’een’ (4/121-123) So how can the saying of ash-Shaafi’ee be a proof if the saying of a companion is not a proof?!

b) How can ash-Shaafi’ee – may Allaah have mercy upon him – be one of those who agree to ‘good innovations’ whilst he said the famous saying: ‘whosoever declares something good has made it part of the sharee’ah,’ and he said in Ar-Risaalah (pg.507), ‘declaring things good (istihsaan) is a form of exercising desires’.

Therefore anyone who wants to explain the words of ash-Shaafi’ee – may Allaah have mercy upon him – then let him do so within the rules and fundamentals of ash-Shaafi’ee – which necessitate understanding his principles – this is something applicable in every branch of knowledge – so he who is ignorant of the terminologies of their specialists will be ignorant of the meaning of their sayings – and will incorrectly explain their meaning, and here is an example to show what we mean:

i) The wording ‘agreed upon’ with the scholars of hadeeth means that which was reported by Bukhaaree and Muslim, however according to Abu Baraaqaat ‘Abdus Salaam Ibn Taymiyyah, the author of ‘Muntaqal Akhbaar’, it means that which is reported by Ahmad, Bukhaaree and Muslim.” [al-Bid’ah’ (pp 63-66)] Even if this statement was authentic, it’s meaning would be that of linguistic bid’ah as was stated by Ibn Rajab, and as we will further clarify in the next note on al-Haafidh Ibn Hajar.

5. Ibn Hajaron bid’ah as in ‘Fath (13/314+) Kitaabul-I’tisaam, Chapter: Following The Sunan of The Prophet sallaahu ‘alayhi wa sallam.

“His saying, ‘and the worst of matters are the newly invented matters.’, and muhadathat means the newly invented matters that have no basis in the sharee’ah, and the are called according to the convention of the sharee’ah ‘bid’ah’, and that which has a basis in the sharee’ah that would prove it then it is not a bid’ah.

So bid’ah in the convention of the sharee’ahis blameworthycontrary to the language (linguistic defintion), for linguisticallyevery thing that is newly invented, be it blameworthy or praiseworthy, is called bid’ah…and ash-Shafi’i said, ‘bid’ah is of two types..’ Reported by Abu Nu’aym via the route of Ibraaheem Ibn Junayd, and there occurs from ash-Shaafi’ee also what is reported by al-Bayhaqee in his ‘Manaaqib’, ‘the newly invented matters are of two types.’ end.

And some of the scholars divided bid’ah into the five categories of ahkaam and this is clear. And it is established from Ibn Mas’ood that he said, ‘indeed you have matured upon the fitrah, but indeed you shall innovate, and things shall be innovated for you, so when you see the innovations then stick to the original guidance’…And Imaam Ahmad reported with a good sanad from Ghadeef Ibnul-Haarith who said, ‘al-Malik Ibn Marwaan sent (someone) to me and he said: indeed we gather the people for two matters: raising the hands (for du’aa) upon the minbar on the day of jumu’ah, and giving exhortations after the fajr and ‘asr prayers. So he said:as for these two, then they are examples of your innovations in my opinion and I will not accept anything of them from you because the Prophet sallaahu ‘alayhi wa sallam said, ‘a people do not introduce an innovation except that a sunnah the likes of it is raised (i.e. forgotten and neglected)’ and sticking to the sunnah is better then introducing a bid’ah’.So if this was the answer of this sahabi concerning a matter that has a basis in the religion, then what do you think the case would be concerning a matter that has no basis in the religion?

And how about when it includes things that contradict the sunnah?….

And as for his saying in the hadeeth of al-Irbaadh, ‘indeed every bid’ah is a misguidance‘ after saying, ‘and beware of the newly invented matters’ proves that newly invented matters are called bid’ah. And his saying, ‘and indeed every bid’ah is misguidance’ is a complete sharee’ah principle both in wording and understanding. As for in wording then it is as if it is said, ‘the ruling of such and such is that it is a bid’ah and every bid’ah is a misguidance’ and so it would not be from the sharee’ah because the sharee’ah, in it’s totality, is guidance…and the meaning of his words ‘every bid’ah is a misguidance’ is that which has been introduced that has no evidence in either a specific or general way…Ibn ‘Abdis Salaam said at the end of ‘al-Qawaa’id’: bid’ah is of five classifications [mentioning the five and some examples of them]” [End of Ibn Hajar’s words]

There are some points to be recognized here:

1. Ibn Hajars quoting from Imaam ash-Shaafi’ee after making clear that in the language bid’ah is of two types but in the Sharee’ah it is only one.

2. Indicating that he understands the statement ‘praiseworthy bid’ah’ in the linguistic sense as did Ibn Rajab.

3. His quoting Ibn ‘Abdis Salaam in his classifying bid’ah into 5 categories but he himself saying, ‘and the meaning of his words ‘every bid’ah is a misguidance’ is that which has been introduced that has no evidence in either a specific or general way’ and other similar statements.

I came across a translation of Ibn al Jawzi’s (ghafarAllahu lahu wa rahimah) argument regarding the belief that Allah is neither inside His creation nor outside of it.

Here is a part of it that I would like to comment on.

Quote:

Furthermore, from another point of view, it can be pointed out that He is neither in this world nor outside it because entering and exiting are inseparable attributes of things which occupy space. Entering and exiting are just like movement and stillness and all other accidents which apply to bodies only.Notice that Ibn al-Zaghūnī claims above [Ibn al-Jawzī had quoted from one of his books] that He did not create things in His Essence (dhāt); therefore, he presumes it is established that they are separate from Him. [In refutation of this claim] we declare [that is, Ibn al-Jawzī] that the Essence of the Transcendent God (dhātuhū al-muqaddasah) is
beyond having things created in it, or that things should occur in it. Now, material separation in relation to Him requires of Him what it requires of substances [namely, that He be defined by finite limits]. Indeed, the definition of location is that what occupies it prevents a similar thing from being found there; [whereas, nothing is similar to God in any way].

It is apparent that what [these anthropomorphists] presume is based on sensory analogy. Their inability to conceive of a reality beyond material experience led them into bewilderment, and to liken the attributes of the Transcendent God to the attributes of originated things [that is, to commit tashbīh].

The last statement is exactly what he (rahimahu Allah), the Asha’irah and mutakalimeen were doing in relation to Allah’s attributes !

Because they could not comprehend a hand that is not like what we see and know, because of Their inability to conceive of a reality beyond material experience led them into bewilderment and to liken the attributes of the Transcendent God to the attributes of originated things [that is, to commit tashbīh] in their minds,which then caused themto reject its dhahir thinking it leads to tashbih, and choose a figurative meaning for it !
They did the same with most of Allah’s attributes.

What he said describes him (rahimahu Allah), the Ash’aris and the other groups who denied Allah’s attributes 0R made tawil of it.

It does not describe us at all.

How is that ?

Firstly: Islam did not come with anything that is irrational (contradicts intellect\reason\’aql)

Islam came with

محارات العقولmaharat al ‘uqool (what bewilders\puzzles the mind)

but did NOT come with

محالات العقولmahalat al ‘uqool (what is impossible in the mind [unfeasible ?? is that also a correct word for it, excuse my bad English])

The belief in Allah having a yad (hand) that is different than that of creation, a hand that we could not imagine because of not seeing something similar to it, for Allah is not like anything, is not impossible.Yes, it puzzles the mind, it is uncomprehendable because it is something that we have not seen anything like, but it is not impossible, only puzzling and bewildering.

If someone had told the people of the past, who came thousands of years before us, about the computer and internet that we have today, they would not beleive it because they wouldn’t be able to comprehend it since they have not seen anything even close to it, but does that mean it is impossible just because they couldn’t comprehend it, or seen anything like it? No.

The same with the fruits of al Jannah and its rivers, castles..etc. It basically shares the name and general meaning of the fruits, rivers..etc. of this dunya, but in its description (kayfiyyah), it is different, it is not like anything we have seen or imagined.

So our belief that Allah has a hand that is not like the of creation, or anything we have seen or know, or exists in creation, a hand that is befitting Allah, is not impossible, it is from the first category (maharat al uqool) not from the second (mahalat al uqool).

We all agree that Allah Has an Essence, and we have no problem believing that His Essence is not like that of any essence we have seen or can imagine, it is not something that is impossible in the mind, the same applies to all of Allah’s attributes.

Meanwhile, from my understanding, Asharis make it (believing Allah to have a hand that is not a limb) from mahalat al uqool (impossibilities of the mind), based on greek logic (ilm al kalam), which is purely derived from some human minds, concluded from limited human observation of the creation , with no backing from shar’i text, then they used this flawed limited human logic in understanding the ayah (nothing is like unto Him), applying it to the Creator’s [Allah] attributes.

Thus contradicting the ayah (nothing is like unto Him), since they used those mens’ conclusions from the limited observation of creation to accept or reject an attribute of the Creator, and give it another meaning that fits more with their logic.

Our belief is based on evidence from the Quran and Sunnah with the understanding of righteous Salaf and Imams of sunnah who came after them. Our beliefs are based on sama’ (hearing/the text), not based on human logic, but at the same time, our belief is not something that is impossible in the human mind, it does not contradict the sound mind.

While Asharis and other groups’ beliefs were affected by ilm al kalam and their flawed understanding of the ayah (Nothing is like unto Him) using their aql (mind) to apply that ayah, if the mind could not comprehend except a hand that is a limb, then it cannot be accepted. In regards to the belief of the later Ashari’s that Allah is neither in His creation nor outside of it, and neither in contact/attached to His creation nor seperate from it, it is from mahalat al uqool (impossibilitiesin the mind).

Before Allah created creation, there was only Allah, then Allah created creation, all agree that Allah did not create it inside of Him, there is only one other choice that is possible in the mind, which is outside of Him.

Allah being neither inside the creation nor outside of it would only be possible if Allah was non-existent.
And Allah exists without any doubt, subhanahu wa Ta’ala.

This belief is not something that puzzles the mind, it is something that the mind finds impossible.

It is like saying that a person is neither alive nor dead, this would only be possible if your speaking about a non-existent person.

Our rejection of such a belief is because:

1. It contradicts the authentic texts stating that Allah is above the Throne, above His creation, which is supported by the statments of the Salaf and many scholars of ahl assunnah who came after them, including some of the early Asharis.

2. There is no text that supports such a belief, and Allah’s saying (laysa kamithlihi shay’ – nothing is like unto Him) is not evidence for such a belief. The Mu’tazilah and Jahmiya used the same ayah to support their false beliefs, they have no evidence for it except their own faulty understanding of the ayah.

3. They have no statments from the Salaf to support such a belief, not even a weak one, while there are many statments by the Salaf and early scholars of Sunnah, sahih and hasan narrations, that state Allah being above His Throne, above the Heavens, separate from His creation.

We didn’t reject it based on its impossibility, but its impossibility strengthens the belief that such a belief is not from shari’ah.

And even if it were possible, we wouldn’t accept it just based on its possibility, it must be supported by text and the understanding of the righteous Salaf.